I've never understood why Big XII / B1G / ACC teams lose to SEC or PAC teams in early season tournaments and never seem to recover from those "losses to top ____ teams" and a loss is a loss. Yet SEC teams lose to other SEC teams (PAC as well) in conference play later with little to no negative impact because they are "good losses".

I think Gasso, Hutch and others just want transparency in how the criteria are applied so they know how to schedule and best control putting themselves in position for the best seeding. Why does it have to be so secretive?

Originally Posted by ChinMusicI've never understood why Big XII / B1G / ACC teams lose to SEC or PAC teams in early season tournaments and never seem to recover from those "losses to top ____ teams" and a loss is a loss. Yet SEC teams lose to other SEC teams (PAC as well) in conference play later with little to no negative impact because they are "good losses".

They also win against SEC and PAC teams later in the year to help offset the losses. Early losses might be forgiven if a team starts beating good teams late in the year (i.e. Ole Miss). Sort of a "recency effect". With fewer opportunities to showcase yourself against true top talent, each win or loss holds a lot more weight.

They also win against SEC and PAC teams later in the year to help offset the losses. Early losses might be forgiven if a team starts beating good teams late in the year (i.e. Ole Miss). Sort of a "recency effect". With fewer opportunities to showcase yourself against true top talent, each win or loss holds a lot more weight.

Just out of curiosity, is the list (the attendees and absentees) on the last page of the below document the composition of this year's selection committee? Or is the selection committee a subset of the entire committee?

Originally Posted by HobbesJust out of curiosity, is the list (the attendees and absentees) on the last page of the below document the composition of this year's selection committee? Or is the selection committee a subset of the entire committee?

That list was last year's committee. The service period starts on August 1.

Division I Women's Softball CommitteeLegislation: Ten members, including six FBS representatives and four Division I or FCS representatives. At least one member shall be selected from each of the eight softball regions (Northeast, South, Mideast, Midwest, West, Pacific, East, Central) and two members selected at-large. No more than two members may be appointed from the same region. Quota of 50 percent administrators: 5.

Liaisons: Sharon CessnaChair: Keisha Dunlap (Aug 2016 - Aug 2017)

*Eligible for reappointment

Division

Region

Title

Name & Institution

Conference

TermExpiration

FBS

PACIFIC REGION

CCD, Associate AD/Compliance

Shalini Shanker Colorado State University

Mountain West Conference

AUG 2019

FBS

NORTHEAST REGION

Head Coach

Michelle DePolo U.S. Military Academy

Patriot League

AUG 2017

FBS

CENTRAL REGION

SWA

Keisha Dunlap Conference USA

Conference USA

AUG 2017

FBS

CENTRAL REGION

SWA, Executive Associate Athletics Director

Lynnette S. Johnson University of Mississippi

Southeastern Conference

AUG 2018

FBS

EAST REGION

SWA, Senior Associate AD

Brandi Stuart University of Central Florida

American Athletic Conference

AUG 2020

FBS

SOUTH REGION

Sr. Assoc. AD

Chris Helms Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Atlantic Coast Conference

AUG 2018

FBS

MIDEAST REGION

Sr. Assoc. AD

Sarah Baumgartner Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick

Originally Posted by MomSooner Fan, If Patty is not looking past her Regional/Tulsa/, then why is she even talking about Auburn?

Of course she's looking past it, despite her lip-service to her regional competitors. Sooner truncated her quote, which continued "but to put two teams that just have played each other in one of the best National Championship finals (OU and Auburn) in a super regional is more of a ratings gimmick than to what makes sense."

Her complaint--whose validity I don't question--only makes sense in the context of where OU winds up *after* the regional round, assuming they win in their regional.

Every year at Garman, ULL would play a couple highly ranked teams before they went home in 2012 after going 2-14 in the nine years from 2004 (a game against Ariz was canceled in 2012). That was in essence two games per year.

They have not played in Palm Springs, at least not since 2004, which is as far back as their online schedules go

It appears that the results were more problematic than the competition

And quit going when those games were not longer in the offing.

As for currently, the addition of health and flight time are also minimizing long trips. That's one reason we've been scheduling a couple of willing SEC teams in OOC scheduling. Hopefully next year we'll have a SEC champion and an ACC champion on the schedule.

They also win against SEC and PAC teams later in the year to help offset the losses. Early losses might be forgiven if a team starts beating good teams late in the year (i.e. Ole Miss). Sort of a "recency effect". With fewer opportunities to showcase yourself against true top talent, each win or loss holds a lot more weight.

"Recentcy" seems to apply when the committee sees fit. Certainly applied to Ole Miss. But 28 of the last 29 didn't carry much weight for OU even though it did include two victories over #10 RPI Baylor and four over #35 OSU. If the rest of Big XII were higher, great! But their not.

So you stack the deck with top tier teams early, take some lumps, then have no opportunity to recover late in the year since you can't control the quality of your late season (conference) opponents.

Just make these committee meetings and discussions public and a big part of the problem is solved (as long as there is some logic that can be followed). At least it won't leave people guessing.

So you stack the deck with top tier teams early, take some lumps, then have no opportunity to recover late in the year since you can't control the quality of your late season (conference) opponents.

I think this is exactly Gasso's point. Described above is the season model for Oklahoma and possibly others in conferences that aren't as strong top-to-bottom as the SEC and Pac. Teams in the SEC and Pac can take lumps at any time during the season and recover in conference play. (Florida State defies both models.) Not blaming anyone, that's just the way it is. Gasso is frustrated because even if Oklahoma scheduled another half-dozen T10 teams, for example, they likely wouldn't win all of them. Then you get to conference play, and there's little opportunity to make up ground.

Last season OU had a game at Tennessee during its "off week" from Big XII play, and the victory certainly helped its ranking. This year the OOC games in the middle of the conference schedule were Arkansas and Mississippi State. Beating them didn't help much.

"Recentcy" seems to apply when the committee sees fit. Certainly applied to Ole Miss. But 28 of the last 29 didn't carry much weight for OU even though it did include two victories over #10 RPI Baylor and four over #35 OSU. If the rest of Big XII were higher, great! But their not.

So you stack the deck with top tier teams early, take some lumps, then have no opportunity to recover late in the year since you can't control the quality of your late season (conference) opponents.

Just make these committee meetings and discussions public and a big part of the problem is solved (as long as there is some logic that can be followed). At least it won't leave people guessing.

THIS!! Yes!__________________Tradition is just fine. Until something better comes along.

Originally Posted by 3leftturnsThere certainly were in Fullerton from 2004 till 2012, when they quit going.

2-14 against Arizona, Arizona State, Michigan and Oklahoma

Yep, 2012 was the last year. In 2013 we had a conference mate who wouldn't reschedule a conference midweek series to allow us to go again. I will say in 2012 though we beat AZST there and were scheduled to play AZ but the game was rained out. We also beat Michigan in the Lead Off, Standford twice in the regional at Lamson Park, and the first game of the SR against AZST before losing two the second day. Funny enough, that was the year we had the #9 RPI in the country with what I think was the #1 OOC RPI in the country and hosted as a #14 seed. It's funny how the more things change the more they remain the same. Thanks for bringing up that memory.

Originally Posted by SoonerFanHer point is dead right. Ole Miss jumping in the RPI is a rigged advantage to any SEC team. The system is flawed but you only complain when it affects you. Hence most of the SEC are silent. Only Bama has a beef.. The Vol coaches are gleefully silent.

Except for her statement is false. Referring to Ole Miss, she said "In the RPI, they went from 23 to 12 and that was kind of shocking." Ole Miss is 18 in the RPI, not 12. Period. You then rely on her false statement to say "the RPI is a rigged advantage for any SEC team."

First of all, the RPI benefitted the Pac-12 more than any conference this year. They had the #2, #3, #4, and #5 teams in the RPI. Why? Because they had the best teams. The RPI clearly benefits teams that play tough schedules, and especially those that win games against very good teams.

Why is OU not higher in the RPI and not seeded in the top 8? Because they lost to Auburn, Washington, Tennessee, Notre Dame, Arizona, and Cal Poly twice. That's it. Win even a couple of those games and your hosting a Super Regional. Nobody rigged anything that harmed OU.

Except for her statement is false. Referring to Ole Miss, she said "In the RPI, they went from 23 to 12 and that was kind of shocking." Ole Miss is 18 in the RPI, not 12. Period. You then rely on her false statement to say "the RPI is a rigged advantage for any SEC team."

First of all, the RPI benefitted the Pac-12 more than any conference this year. They had the #2, #3, #4, and #5 teams in the RPI. Why? Because they had the best teams. The RPI clearly benefits teams that play tough schedules, and especially those that win games against very good teams.

Why is OU not higher in the RPI and not seeded in the top 8? Because they lost to Auburn, Washington, Tennessee, Notre Dame, Arizona, and Cal Poly twice. That's it. Win even a couple of those games and your hosting a Super Regional. Nobody rigged anything that harmed OU.

Originally Posted by Fpitch9You can't spell Gasso without ass. The World Series is played in her backyard every year.

Fairly idiotic comment from someone that I'm sure knows her personally, but I guess maybe your just speaking of grammar.

I would strongly state that she is a wonderful individual who molds her players into great young women, as most coaches do. She is also a GREAT coach.

Her comments are not just about what happened to OU, I personally think they are where they belong, but more the injustice that happened to Minny as well as the horrible over seeding of Ole Miss, no way possible that they are the 12th best team in the country.

Originally Posted by ChinMusic This is why the RPI sucks. It's kinda of like saying "the four point grading scale clearly benefits students who own the text books, especially those that READ the text books."

Insert Photos

Web address (URL)

Image URL

If your URL is correct, you'll see an image preview here. Large images may take a few minutes to appear.
Remember: Using others' images on the web without their permission may be bad manners, or worse, copyright infringement.